Last week, the New York Times garnered publicity by trying to claim that the 9-11-2012 attacks in Benghazi really WERE because of an obtuse, low budget, You Tube video that, essentially, nobody saw.

The fallout was decisive from their inopportune editorial.

Members of congress from both parties quickly derided the opinion piece as bunk, citing evidence gathered via sources under oath from house and senate hearings that pointed directly toward al Qaeda and their affiliate, Ansar al Sharia…al Qaeda by another name.

Many called the NYT piece what it was.

Cover for Hillary’s 2016 ambitions but…

I contend there is more to it than that.

Much more to it than that.

Before I delve into what that much more is, we need to take a quick look at the claims made in the Times.

First…

Here is the direct quote from David D. Kirkpatrick of the Times in that piece:

“Months of investigation by The New York Times, centered on extensive interviews with Libyans in Benghazi who had direct knowledge of the attack there and its context, turned up no evidence that Al Qaeda or other international terrorist groups had any role in the assault. The attack was led, instead, by fighters who had benefited directly from NATO’s extensive air power and logistics support during the uprising against Colonel Qaddafi. And contrary to claims by some members of Congress, it was fueled in large part by anger at an American-made video denigrating Islam.”

The New York Times…Conducted MONTHS of INVESTIGATIONS and turned up NO EVIDENCE that al Qaeda or OTHER international terrorist groups had ANY role in the…ASSAULT???

And who did the left-wing rag interview in their “investigation???

LIBYANS in BENGHAZI who, they claim, had DIRECT KNOWLEDGE OF THE…”ATTACK.”

Well, which was it?

An ATTACK or an ASSAULT???

¹as·sault

noun \ə-ˈsȯlt\

law : the crime of trying or threatening to hurt someone physically

¹at·tack

verb \ə-ˈtak\

: to act violently against (someone or something) : to try to hurt, injure, or destroy (something or someone)

To be clear, what happened that night in Benghazi, was an ATTACK pure and simple.

Next…

“And contrary to claims by some members of Congress, it was fueled in large part by anger at an American-made video denigrating Islam.”

BULLCRAP…100% BULLCRAP and the New York Times KNOWS it’s BULLCRAP.

That video had barely been released before the attack and, it wasn’t translated into the language of the region until AFTER the attack. Virtually NOBODY had seen it here OR there.

And, what we know from those who were there, and survived, the attack was HIGHLY coordinated with pinpoint mortar fire, troop-like movements, command and control and took place in 2 locations hours apart with the same devastating effect.

An unruly mob or pissed off protesters this was NOT.

CLEARLY.

The Egyptian equivalent of our head of the CIA has stated without hesitation that it WAS, indeed, al Qaeda and a TERRORIST, PRE-PLANNED attack that transpired.

The “president” of Libya, just a day after the attack, stated with CERTAINTY that what happened WAS a TERRORIST attack and a well PLANNED attack at that.

Ansar al Sharia had previously attacked the British Ambassador, made 2 strikes against the Red Cross and 2 preliminary attacks against OUR Consulate in Benghazi.

The Brits and the Red Cross had BOTH pulled OUT of Benghazi because of the rise in TERRORIST activity there.

The black flag of al Qaeda had been flying over Benghazi since the day Gaddafi had been killed.

It WAS al Qaeda (Ansar al Sharia) and even THEY claimed victorious responsibility FOR it.

So…Given all of the REAL evidence…Why WOULD the New York Times try to, once again, blame that innocuous You Tube Video?

In PART, and ONLY in part, to provide cover for Hillary’s ample, pant-suited ass.

SHE had been in charge of the State Department. SHE was responsible for drawing down OUR security in Benghazi. SHE was ultimately responsible for the HIRING of NEW security in Benghazi and…Who DID she hire???

The 17th of February Brigade…Otherwise known as…ANSAR AL SHARIA…That’s who.

But, as I said, there is more…MUCH more to this.

Obama and Hillary were COLLUDING in TREASON.

Together, they were using the State Department to run weapons from Libyan “rebels” to Syrian “rebels” via Turkish strawmen.

It was Fast and Furious all over again only THIS time, it was a transfer of arms between TERRORISTS.

Ansar al Sharia…Libya’s al Qaeda and al Qaeda in Syria.

AL QAEDA IS THE ENEMY…IN A TIME OF WAR and aiding them or their affiliates rises to HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS!!!

TREASON…DAMN IT!!!!

The timing OF the NYT, David Kirkpatrick piece is evidence in and of itself.

As more and more CIA survivors testify behind congressional closed doors, because of the sensitive nature of the information regarding their mission in Benghazi, more and more REAL evidence is being gathered and, in such a case as this…TREASON…those in a position to make such charges MUST dot EVERY “i” and cross EVERY “t” so as NOT to allow even a HAIR’S width of wiggle room.

Liberals, no doubt, are feeling the pressure and so are Hillary and Obama as their worlds are beginning to crumble.

There can be little doubt that this administration, most likely via Valerie Jarrett or other 3^rd parties, put the pressure to the NYT to resurrect the fabricated “You Tube” cover story for the purpose of a preemptive “reasonable doubt” strike against what they believe is coming.

Obama himself couldn’t reintroduce the BS cover story because, after 3 weeks of the initial lie, he lied to cover it by claiming he knew all along and said from the get-go that it WAS a TERRORIST attack.

Liberals in CONGRESS jumped all over the Times piece because THEY bought into and propelled the Obama “I SAID it was terrorism all along” lie during last weeks of the 2012 campaign but…There is much more, I believe, to THAT too.

As Obama is feeling the Benghazi pressure, it is clearly because he’s been informed of the progress regarding the gathering of REAL evidence, by liberal Members of congress since THEY are hearing the same testimony behind the doors as are the Republicans.

While the left side of the aisle is not ready, at this point, to accuse the treasonous Obama of his crimes, they aren’t willing to shill for him either because THEY are feeling the heat of the “lie of the year” teller’s domestic disaster and to get caught trying to cover Obama’s narrow ass on Benghazi would end the Democrat party for DECADES.

And, while it wouldn’t do her 2016 aspirations a damn bit of good…

All congressional liberals can do now, is try, in desperation, to salvage what they can of Hillary’s “million mile” Secretary of State legacy by finding some way to paint her as being out of touch or duped by the lead-up to the Benghazi attacks.

In their eyes…The “smartest” woman in the world would fare better as a dolt than as a traitor.

Speculation?

Perhaps but, speculation backed by far too much circumstantial evidence to be ignored and THAT is brought into focus by HR 3741…A bill introduced in the house by: Elijah Cummings (Md.), Keith Ellison (Minn. And a Muslim), Barbara Lee (Calif.), Hank Johnson (Ga.), John Lewis (Ga.), Jan Schakowsky (Ill.) and José Serrano (N.Y. Hillary’s senatorial state) ALL DEMOCRATS back in January of 2012.

What’s so special, to this whole Benghazi case, about HR 3741 is that it would…ELIMINATE THE DEATH PENALTY FOR…Among other things…Using chemical or biological materials to kill…kidnapping and killing people to stop them from testifying…AND…DEATHS RELATED TO TREASON OR ESPIONAGE!!!

Yes, I know Benghazi didn’t happen until September of 2012 but…Remember what WAS going on in JANUARY of 2012???

Gaddafi had just been killed in part because Obama had “led from behind” and SUPPLIED WEAPONS TO THE TERRORIST “REBELS” IN LIBYA and…The Muslim Brotherhood’s MORSI was on HIS way to taking over in EGYPT due to Obama’s interference with Mubarak.

Don’t forget that Hillary’s number one adviser was HUMA ABEDIN who has inescapable family ties directly WITH the Muslim Brotherhood and Obama’s number one adviser…VALERIE JARRET…Is inescapably tied to the Islamist TERRORIST LOVING…IRAN.

Those 8 liberals who introduced HR 3741 knew that it was only a matter of time before Obama would be committing TREASON and, in introducing that bill when they did was, in and of itself…Preemptive in nature.

Terrorist friendly dictators like Saddam and Gaddafi hadn’t fared well either in their country’s systems of justice OR in the American court of public opinion and clearly, the pack of 8 in the house, were trying to provide a somewhat better outcome for America’s Hussein, should the house of cards collapse.

So…The NY Times is trying to provide cover for Hillary in 2016…For the rest of Obama’s term AND for their collaborative treason but, if you think it stops there…Think again.

There is more…LOTS more…

In tomorrow’s Weekend Edition.

Don’t miss it!!!

Craig Andresen

The National Patriot

Weekend Edition 1/4/2014